The proposed California law restricting the sale of violent video games to minors, Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants Association and Entertainment Software Association, is set to go before the U.S. Supreme Court on Nov. 2. Two lower courts have already deemed it unconstitutional since California passed the ban in 2005, but it looks like the Supreme Court is needed to finally shut the door on this issue.

It’s ironic that a governor who earned his fame and fortune with violent movies — “Terminator” and “Commando” come to mind — is attempting to regulate the violent content of the video game industry. However, this law could have major effects for retailers, publishers, developers and, of course, consumers.

If passed, the law would require game publishers to place a 2-by-2-inch sticker on violent games, which the law describes as games that “depict killing, maiming, dismembering or sexually assaulting the image of a human being” — I guess dismembering and sexually assaulting bears and robots is OK.

This would replace the familiar rating system already assigned by the Entertainment Software Rating Board. The ESRB already prominently places ratings — E for everyone to M for Mature — on video games, so this law would effectively fix a problem that doesn’t exist.

Retailers who sell these games to minors will receive fines up to $1,000 per sale. These changes might not seem like anything to worry about, but this is the first step toward federal regulation of the video game industry, lumping it in the same category as pornography.

This law isn’t isolated to “The Golden State,” 11 other states: Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Texas and Virginia have claimed their support for the ban.

At Iowa State, Craig Anderson, distinguished professor of psychology, and Doug Gentile, assistant professor of psychology, have researched the effects of video games on young people. Anderson led a study analyzing more than 130,000 subjects across the world who claimed to prove exposure to violent video games increased aggression and damaged prosocial behavior.

Similar efforts have failed to satisfy lower courts in more than a dozen other rulings.

“None of the research establishes or suggests a causal link between minors playing violent video games and actual psychological or neurological harm, and inferences to that effect would not be reasonable,” said Judge Consuelo Callahan of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Even though video games are becoming more popular every day, there are still people who view them as mysterious murder simulators distinctively harmful to youth. How refreshing; an older generation does not understand a new media and responds with fear and hate.

Anderson’s research suggests the increased aggression caused by playing violent video games is on a similar level to watching violent movies or television. Even though the impact is noticeable, it is an issue that can be addressed easily, unlike gang membership or poverty levels.

If the Supreme Court rules the law unconstitutional, it could be a valuable stride toward ensuring that video games receive the same free speech protections as music, movies and books, which are currently regulated by consumers, retailers and regulatory organizations — games have the ESRB and movies have the Motion Picture Association of America.

The video game industry is still seen by many as a few reputable steps above the porn industry and several steps below the music and movie industries. This viewpoint hinders the creative development of video games and allows a movie critic — like Roger Ebert — to claim that they can never be art and that no games deserve his attention long enough to play one.

I don’t know about you, but I am the type of person who would prefer to see a painting or sculpture before calling it an uninspired piece of garbage. Freedom of speech and artistic expression are not the only matters to concern.

As with other forms of entertainment and media, parents should be responsible for what their child is exposed to. This law seeks to bypass the issue. Telling children they cannot experience different media simply because “it’s bad for them,” will only make the violent material more appealing. A better solution would be to discuss the content openly and do the research to determine which content is appropriate for your children.

When discussing the correlation between violence and media, Gentile said there is no one cause for violent acts and a combination of elements — poor parenting, lack of role models and bullying — add up to result in increased aggression.

So, I would suggest focusing on the real issues instead of supporting a poorly written law that addresses the matter by slapping larger stickers on video games. Yes, I know Arnold Schwarzenegger was able to win the trust and respect of that class in “Kindergarten Cop,” but that doesn’t mean he can raise your kids.